PharmacoEconomics

, Volume 30, Issue 8, pp 697–712 | Cite as

A Parent-Child Dyad Approach to the Assessment of Health Status and Health-Related Quality of Life in Children with Asthma

  • Wendy J. Ungar
  • Katherine Boydell
  • Sharon Dell
  • Brian M. Feldman
  • Deborah Marshall
  • Andrew Willan
  • James G. Wright
Original Research Article

Abstract

Background

Assessment of health state and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) are limited by a child’s age and cognitive ability. Parent-proxy reports are known to differ from children’s reports. Simultaneous assessment using a parent-child dyad is an alternative approach.

Objective

Our objective was to assess the validity, reliability and responsiveness of a parent-child dyad approach to utility and HR-QOL assessment of paediatric asthma health states.

Methods

The setting was specialist care in a hospital-based asthma clinic. Participants were 91 girls and boys with asthma aged 8 to 17 years and 91 parents. The intervention employed was parent-child dyad administration of the Health Utilities Index (HUI) 2 and 3, the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™ (PedsQL™) Core and Asthma modules, and the Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ).

Questionnaires were administered by interview to children and parents separately and then together as a dyad to assess the child’s health state. The dyad interview was repeated at the next clinic visit. Dyad-child agreement was measured by intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficient; Spearman correlations were used to assess convergent validity. Test-retest reliability was assessed in 28 children who remained clinically stable between visits with a two-way ICC coefficient. Responsiveness to change from baseline was assessed with Spearman coefficients in 30 children who demonstrated clinical change between visits.

Results

There was no significant agreement between parent and child for the HUI2 or HUI3 whereas agreement between dyad and child was 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36, 0.69) for the HUI2 and 0.74 (95% CI 0.61, 0.82) for the HUI3 overall. With respect to dyad performance characteristics, both HUI2 and HUI3 overall scores demonstrated moderate convergent validity with the generic PedsQL™ Core domains (range r=0.30–0.52;p<0.01). Dyad HUI2 attributes demonstrated moderate convergent validity with the generic PedsQL™ Core domains of similar constructs (range r=0.35–0.43;p<0.001) and weaker convergent validity with disease-specific domains (range r=0.13–0.32). Dyad HUI3 attributes demonstrated weaker convergent validity compared with the HUI2. For the assessment of test-retest reliability, significant agreement between baseline and follow-up was observed for dyad HUI2 total (r=0.53), dyad PedsQL™ Core summary (r=0.70) and select dyad disease-specific domains. Significant responsiveness (r>0.4; p<0.05) was observed for dyad HUI2 total score change over time as correlated with dyad HUI3, dyad PedsQL™ Core summary and select disease-specific domains.

Conclusions

The parent-child dyad approach demonstrated moderate to strong performance characteristics in generic and disease-specific questionnaires suggesting it may be a valuable alternative to relying on parent proxies for assessing children’s utility and HR-QOL. Future research in additional paediatric populations, younger children and a population-based sample would be useful.

References

  1. 1.
    Sung L, Petrou S, Ungar WJ. Measurement of health utilities in children. In: Ungar WJ, editor. Economic evaluation in child health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010:77–90Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ungar WJ, Gerber A. The uniqueness of child health and challenges to measuring costs and consequences. In: Ungar WJ, editor. Economic evaluation in child health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010: 3–32Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Finkelstein JW. Methods, models and measures of health-related quality of life for children and adolescents. In: Drotar D, editor. Measuring health-related quality of life in children and adolescents. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1998: 39–52Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jacobson AM, Fried K. Conceptual issues in developing quality of life assessments for children: illustrations from studies of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. In: Drotar D, editor. Measuring health-related quality of life in children and adolescents. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1998: 131–50Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosenbaum PJ, Saigal S. Measuring health-related quality of life in pediatric populations: conceptual issues. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd rev. ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1996: 785–91Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Annett RD. Assessment of health status and quality of life outcomes for children with asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001; 107: S473–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ratcliffe J, Couzner L, Flynn T, et al. Valuing Child Health Utility 9D health states with a young adolescent sample. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2011; 9(1): 15–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brunner HI, Maker D, Grundland B, et al. Preference-based measurement of health related quality of life (HRQL) in children with chronic musculoskeletal disorders (MSKD). Med Decis Making 2003; 23(4): 314–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eiser C, Morse R. Quality-of-life measures in chronic diseases of childhood. Health Technol Assess 2001; 5(4): 1–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saigal S, Rosenbaum PJ, Hoult L, et al. Conceptual and methodological issues in assessing health-related quality of life in children and adolescents: illustrations from studies of extremely low birthweight survivors. In: Drotar D, editor. Measuring health-related quality of life in children and adolescents. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1998: 151–69Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sung L, Young NL, Greenberg ML, et al. Health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores reported from parents and their children with chronic illness differed depending on utility elicitation method. J Clin Epidemiol 2004; 57(11): 1161–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Belfort MB, Zupancic JAF, Riera KM, et al. Health state preferences associated with weight status in children and adolescents. BMC Pediatr 2011; 11: 12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fluchel M, Horsman JR, Furlong W, et al. Self and proxyreported health status and health-related quality of life in survivors of childhood cancer in Uruguay. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2008 Apr; 50(4): 838–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pal DK. Quality of life assessment in children: a review of conceptual and methodological issues in multidimensional health status measures. J Epidemiol Community Health 1996 Aug; 50(4): 391–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Petrou S. Methodological issues raised by preference-based approaches to measuring the health status of children. Health Econ 2003; 12(8): 697–702PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Simon SB, Howe LW, Kirschenbaum H. Values clarification: a handbook of practical strategies for teachers and students. New York: Hart Publishing, 1972Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ungar WJ, Mirabelli C, Cousins M, et al. A qualitative analysis of a dyad approach to health-related quality of life measurement in children with asthma. Soc Sci Med 2006 Nov; 63(9): 2354–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Feeny D, Juniper EF, Ferrie PJ, et al. Why not just ask the kids? Health-related quality of life in children with asthma. In: Drotar D, editor. Measuring health-related quality of life in children and adolescents. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1998: 171–85Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Olson LM, Asmussen L. Current methods in measuring health-related quality of life in children with asthma. In: Weiss KB, Buist AS, Sullivan SD, editors. Asthma’s impact on society, the social and economic burden. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc., 2000: 99–126Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Halfon N, Newacheck PW. Characterizing the social impact of asthma in children. In: Weiss KB, Buist AS, Sullivan SD, editors. Asthma’s impact on society, the social and economic burden. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc., 2000: 23–53Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Walter SD, Eliasziw M, Donner A. Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med 1998; 17: 101–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Feeny D, Torrance GW, Furlong W. Health utilities index. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd rev. ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1996: 239–52Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Rapoff MA, et al. The PedsQL in pediatric asthma: reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory generic core scales and asthma module. J Behav Med 2004; 27(3): 297–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Varni JW, Seid M, Kurtin PS. PedsQL™ 4.0: reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory version 4.0 generic core scales in healthy and patient populations. Med Care 2001; 39(8): 800–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Eiser C, Morse R. The measurement of quality of life in children: past and future perspectives. J Dev Behav Pediatr 2001; 22(4): 248–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd rev. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Saigal S, Feeny D, Rosenbaum PJ, et al. Self-perceived health status and health-related quality of life of extremely low-birth-weight infants at adolescence. J Pediatr 1997; 130(3): 495Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Glaser AW, Furlong W, Walker DA, et al. Applicability of the Health Utilities Index to a population of childhood survivors of central nervous system tumours in the UK. Eur J Cancer 1999; 35(2): 256–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Varni JW, Seid M, Smith-Knight T, et al. The PedsQL 4.0 generic core scales: sensitivity, responsiveness, and impact on clinical decision-making. J Behav Med 2002; 25(2): 175–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chan KS, Mangione-Smith R, Burwinkle TM, et al. Reliability and validity of the short-form generic core scales and asthma module. Med Care 2005; 43(3): 256–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, et al. Minimum skills required by children to complete health-related quality of life instruments for asthma: comparison of measurement properties. Eur Resp J 1997; 10: 2285–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, et al. Measuring quality of life in children with asthma. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 35–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Becker A, Berube D, Chad A, et al. Canadian pediatric asthma consensus guidelines, 2003 (updated to December 2004) CMAJ 2005; 173(6): S12–S4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee. Expert panel report 3: guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma. Bethesda (MD): National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, National Institute of Health, 2007Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Juniper EF, O’Byrne PM, Guyatt GH, et al. Development and validation of a questionnaire to measure asthma control. Eur Resp J 1999; 14: 902–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sung L, Greenberg ML, Doyle JJ, et al. Construct validation of the health utilities index and the child health questionnaire in children undergoing cancer chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 2003; 88(8): 1185–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chron Dis 1987; 40(2): 171–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Garner R, Kohen D. Changes in the prevalence of asthma among Canadian children. Health Rep 2008; 19(2): 45–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rietveld S, Prins PJ, Kolk AM. The capacity of children with and without asthma to detect external resistive loads on breathing. J Asthma 1996; 33(4): 221–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schlottman A. Children’s judgment of gambles: a disordinal violation of utility. J Behav Decis Making 2000; 13: 77–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Guyatt GH, Juniper EF, Griffith LE, et al. Children and adult perceptions of childhood asthma. Pediatrics 1997; 99(2): 165–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Edelbrock C, Costello AJ, Dulcan MK, et al. Parent-child agreement on child psychiatric symptoms assessed via structured interview. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1986; 27(2): 181–90PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Herjanic B, Herjanic M, Brown F, et al. Are children reliable reporters? J Abnorm Child Psychol 1975; 3: 41–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Herjanic B, Reich W. Development of a structured psychiatric interview for children: agreement between child and parent on individual symptoms. J Abnorm Child Psychol 1997 Feb; 25(1): 21–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kashani JH, Orvaschel H, Burk JP, et al. Informant variance: the issue of parent-child disagreement. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 1985; 24(4): 437–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kazdin AE, French NH, Unis AS, et al. Assessment of childhood depression: correspondence of child and parent ratings. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 1983; 22(2): 157–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Shiell A, Hawe P, Seymour J. Values and preferences are not necessarily the same. Health Econ 1997; 6(9): 515–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Saigal S, Rosenbaum PL, Feeny D, et al. Parental perspectives of the health status and health-related quality of life of teen-aged children who were extremely low birth weight and term controls. Pediatrics 2000; 105(3): 569–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Verrips GH, Stuifbergen MC, den Ouden AL, et al. Measuring health status using the Health Utilities Index: agreement between raters and between modalities of administration. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54(5): 475–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Prosser LA, Hammitt JK, Keren R. Measuring health preferences for use in cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses of interventions in children: theoretical and methodological considerations. Pharmacoeconomics 2007; 25(9): 713–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    De Civita M, Regier D, Alamgir AH, et al. Evaluating health-related quality-of-life studies in paediatric populations: some conceptual, methodological and developmental considerations and recent applications. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23(7): 659–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wendy J. Ungar
    • 1
  • Katherine Boydell
    • 1
  • Sharon Dell
    • 1
  • Brian M. Feldman
    • 1
  • Deborah Marshall
    • 2
  • Andrew Willan
    • 1
  • James G. Wright
    • 1
  1. 1.Program of Child Health Evaluative SciencesThe Hospital for Sick ChildrenTorontoCanada
  2. 2.The University of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations